Posted by: Barry Bickmore | August 2, 2010

The Monckton Files: Threatening Scott Mandia

Given the number of threats Lord Monckton has been lobbing about recently, I’m getting the impression that John Abraham’s critique has him coming a bit unglued.  Scott Mandia, a meteorology/climate professor at Suffolk County Community College who runs the popular Global Warming:  Man or Myth? blog, recently encouraged people to alert media outlets about how Monckton has misrepresented the facts about climate science and then threatened people like John Abraham who expose him. Prof. Mandia wrote,

Monckton has been exposed by Dr. John Abraham and instead of hiding his tail and whimpering away, Monckton has gone on the offensive by attacking Dr. Abraham and asking his followers to essentially “email bomb” Dr. Abraham’s university president.  We need to alert the media to this story.

In his sample letter to media contacts, he said,

Please investigate the Monckton and Abraham story.  Expose Monckton for the fraud that he is, and by doing so, you may regain the trust of scientists that may be shunning mass media because of the journalistic false balance that discourages scientific engagement with the media.

What?!!!  How could Prof. Mandia encourage the media to investigate whether Monckton is “a fraud”?  I mean, what has he done (aside from pretending to be a member of Parliament, making up data, butchering nearly every scientific topic he brings up, claiming to have invented a miracle cure, etc., etc., etc.)?  Well, His Lordship wasn’t having any of that!  Here’s what he wrote in an e-mail to Scott.

Dear Professor Mandia, – My attention has been drawn to the following weblink:

http://profmandia.wordpress.com/2010/07/18/turn-the-tables-on-monckton/

I am surprised that you express support for Professor Abraham. It may be that you have not had the opportunity to dip into my careful and detailed reply indicating that at a number of points during his presentation he told lies, knowingly and willfully misrepresenting what I had said, conveying these fanciful misrepresentations to third-party scientists, obtaining understandably negative comments from them, and then using the comments publicly against me.

I also note that you have publicly accused me of “fraud”, and have widely circulated that accusation on the internet, and have expressed the intention to invite the mass media to repeat it. Since this is a serious charge, do you have any evidence to back it up, or should I add your name to that of Professor Abraham in the libel case that will be filed shortly? – Monckton of Brenchley

My guess is that the threat of a libel suit is just more hot air, since I doubt Monckton wants his Rap Sheet aired in court.

About these ads

Responses

  1. He’s a fruitcake.

    And, unlike Screaming Mad Lord Such (PBUH), he’s not in the least bit clever or entertaining.

    Though it’s rather grand that the Knackered Knight has yet again shoved his pedemidial extremities into his entrant digestive tract and put yet again the same libelous and fraudulent statements (against Abrahams) that Scott is asking to be investigated!

  2. Thank you Barry for your support.

  3. Why aren’t you on Monckton’s hit-list?

    • Well, he did claim he had a big donor to my university persuading the president to launch an academic investigation against me. He never mentioned a libel suit, though.

  4. No one should be surprised that Monckton would stoop so low when he “goes on the offensive”. The facts of the case do not support him, so the empty threat of libel suits is all he has.

    But let’s not forget: Monckton has NO genuine interest in the science. His only interest lies somewhere else. He has a knack for persuading people of the false conclusion he chose for them by his own dishonest ‘debate’ techniques.

    How is it that he is so successful? To make a scientific study of that, we really have to start with a much earlier work, one that describes both honest and dishonest persuasion techniques, Aristotle’s “On Rhetoric”. The translation at MIT’s site, is good enough, but incomplete (http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/rhetoric.html). For a better translation with notes, and complete, we can turn to http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/philosophes/Aristote/rheto1.htm. The only catch is that it is in French;)

    It should not take long for the reader to recognize Monckton’s abuse of these techniques after reading that source.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 239 other followers

%d bloggers like this: